MEE X@W1EL20 ©W ME NEM, =NETT EMNE12, RR@ HAMM Limi5

Home , Intertel, Mega Society, Triple Nine Society

HORN@

P. Maxim to Dr. Robert J. Davis -- 'Tear-End Report' -- Page 2.

According to TELICOM, approximately 90 ISPE members now have online systems, as indicated by their e-mail add This means that about 600 members do not MEE X@W1EL20 ©W have online systems, and hence cannot 'download" the new Roster, or any other materials that are being disseminated via the DES network. Doesn't it seem as though this arrangement is discriminatory, and is creating • 'two class" system ME NEM, =NETT within ISPE? In other words, the online members are clearly enjoying greater privileges, and accessibility to information, than the 'offline" members. I personally have nothing against technology, and recognise it as the 'wave of the future,' but at the same time I am 'struck by ISPE's failure to acknowledge, EMNE12, RR@ or confront, the problems that are being created by this de facto discriminatior Consequently. I recommend that the Society immediately esEibniire committee to study the impact of online systems on its operations, and that input on this sul HAMM liMI5 ject be solicited from the membership at large.

3. NOESIS as a Vehicle for Dialog. / recently became affiliated with the Mega sEsairi, as a IUSWEEibil and contributor to its journal, NOESIS. As you EDITOR may be . this Society is somewhat smaller than ISPE, but its journal is R. Rosner nonetheless an excellent publication, and provides a truly open forum, in which contributors can address each other without editorial repression or censorship. 5711 Rhodes Ave This is why I am publishing my Report to you in NOESIS, and not in TELICOM. N. Hollywood CA 91607-1627 since I know that, if I submitted it to ISPE's journal, it would never appear 1: print. I notice that you, yourself, have made no contributions to TZLICOM over (818) 985-5230 the past few years, and hence I wonder whether you also have been precluded fro publishing your submissions therein. Note: Dues remain $2.00 per issue, payable to Rosner, not Mega or Noesis. You still A few years ago, I was informed, by Mr. Do earn one issue per two pages of published items. Please submit mucho (concise, cakis, that you had an extremely high ig, which I was very gratified to learn. But even if you don't measure up to Mega Society's admissions standards, you interesting) material. are nonetheless welcome to subscribe to NOESIS, and I cordially invite you to (I recently received a small item concerning a guy ejaculating in his pants. I've do so -- in fact. I am willing to buy you • subscription for 1996. My thought learned from running my own material in that vein that it angers too many readers. is that, if you are willing, we could carry on • dialog therein concerning key issues in ISPE and the high-IQ community, free from TELICOM's editorial inter- So, no more stuff about spoojing unless it's so damn wonderful it cannot be denied.) ference. Will you accept my offer? IN THIS ISSUE: Wishing you • Nappy New Year, I roma Sid direly yours, LETTER FROM CHRIS LANGAN TO ROBERT DICK att,t,VkAY (A- NORMING #1 OF THE LANGDON INT. GRADIENT HIGH-RANGE TEST THE MOBIUS TEST, BY CYRIL EDWARDS AND KEVIN LANGDON LETTER FROM PAUL MAXIM HOW INTELLIGENT IS ISPE? BY PAUL MAXIM

ges comment-Some Nona readers receive many otter high-I0 journals Some LETTER FROM PAUL MAXIM DISSING KEVIN LANGDON'S ICI receive only Mrs because it avoids much of the pcticaI wiranghng seen in other ACCOMPANIED BY MATERIAL WRITTEN BY KEVIN LANGDON high-10 publications I don't want to do much censorship. neither do I want • whole lot ot ISPE business transacted in NOOLS THE KORMES CASE AND ITS AFTERMATH, BY PAUL MAXIM LETTER FROM PAUL MAXIM TO SOME ISPE GUY ABOUT, AMONG OTHER THINGS, USING NOESIS AS AN OPEN FORUM

Magni Meant- .1 IS March 1555 floe 25 LETTER FROM CHRIS LANGAN TO ROBERT DICK Dear Bob Dick:

I'm pleased that you've replied to my letter in a more or less coherent way, at least as regards form That is, content aside, you put your remarks in a way that seems to admit of meaningful response. I'll proceed in chronological order. ISPE Memo Tot Dr. Robert J. Davis, Trustee, 307 Pleasant Street, Belmont, MA From. Paul Maxim, Fellow, P.O. Box 120, New York, N.Y. 10012-0002 RUSTect: Year-End Report, 1995-96. In your first letter, you begin by inviting me to insult you at will. Inasmuch as you were the one calling me stupid, your invitation seems a bit hypocritical. If insults damage the credibility of those who use 1. /Comes Verdict. / obtained a copy of the Court's Final Ruling in the them, then I suggest that you reassess your own before carrying on. case of John Korman V. ISPE, and by reading it, I concluded that TEL/COM's report on this verdict (September 1995, pp. 6-7) was inadequate and incomplete You say I have a "remarkably short memory But I don't, at least by common standards. What I TXLICOM correctly reported that the Court (ruling in equity, not 'in law') do have had denied Formes' plea for reinstatement into ISPE, following his 1991 expert- is an apparent tendency to overestimate the extent to which others can comprehend and recall what I've sins. However, it failed to note other, even more important portions of the written. If I err, it would seem that I err in your favor. ,JMcj&s ruling, such as the followings

You say you don't know what I mean by "reality' In light of our interaction to date, I confess that this 'UPS has not complied with the terms of its own Charter when it purported doesn't surprise me Reality is defined on two mathematical concepts, to expel Plaintiff. There is no provision in the Charter governing the relevance and closure; it is a eXpulsion of members.' (This was obviously written prior to ISPE's adoptiOn mathematical system, generated by cognition, which is closed with respect to relevance. I.e., that which c ';At ndment No, 1,' which specified automatic expulsion for anyone sui40 has an effect that you can perceive is real; by extension, so is anything that has an effect that has...an ci p r effect that can affect either you or that which you can ultimately affect. Nothing else is. This "recursive 'Cushing's Manual (of Parliamentary rrectime) provides members wits definition" requires a set of careful qualifications, but suffices for purposes of logical analysis. Notice that the right to both prior notice and an opportunity to defend against char s. it is a doorway through which all kinds of fantasy and irrationality can gain access to reality, given only a Since this procedure is incorporated into (ISPE's) Charter. the Board of Trustees exceeded its authority in the manner in which it purported to e I foothold in the mind of an intelligent creature such as you...to which, however, they are confined in "(Plaintiff). By expelling Mr. Kormes without affording him any opportun y certain important respects. to contest any allegations, in direct conflict with the Charter provision% incorporating Cushing's Manual, Mr. Kormes has been deprived of his contrac- Next you admit that your remarks have been "rather hostile". I commend your honesty. tual rights by the unilateral decision of the ISPE Board of Trustees.' ruling, as I understand it, also found fault with ISPE's 1990 expulsion of You profess indifference to the physical thrust of Newcomb's paradox, then claim interest in its "religious Clint Williams, for the same reasons as were cited in the instance of John Kar- and interpersonal" aspects. Yet, any religion which fails to account for physics, especially as it relates to nes ---- that is, Williams had been expelled via unilateral action of the free will, is a joke. Personalities, of course, have no bearing whatsoever. Board of Trustees, and had not been accorded either a hearing or a presentation of charges, or an opportunity of defending himself against the charges before an impartial panel. You claim I garbled your remarks about the Pope and Mensa. I disagree. While I concur that the reigning I am having some difficulty understanding why TELICOM Pope is relatively intelligent, he is a human being with a weighty interest in denying and suppressing any chose to publish such • one-sided account of the Court's decision in this case. ideology which, by claiming logical dominion over his own, provides an avenue through which his "divine After all, this is the first time that any of ISPE's member expulsions has been authority' might be challenged. This would seem to render otiose any attempt to convert him to a subjected to judicial review; in other words, the Court's ruling represents an disinterested way of thinking. Second, religious language - especially as Popes are wont to use it - extremely important document as regards ISPE's policies and governance. In appeals more to tradition and the emotions than to logic and the intellect. Thus, regardless of his light of this, shouldn't the verdict have been published in full, so that all members could read it? /f TELICOM publishes a slanted or onitileed account of personal saintliness and intelligence, the Pope is unlikely to display much understanding towards the verdict, and if some member (such as myself) subsequently discovers that anything that falls outside an artificially narrow range of discourse (with due respect to the papacy of there was more to the verdict than was repeated, doesn't this tend to cast John Paul II. once you begin talking about politicized institutions and the mentalities they breed, you are doubt on TELICOM's integrity, or on the willingness of ISPE to fully inform its obviously no longer talking about pure spirituality). members? I am reminded somewhat of the editorial policies of the 'old' Pravda (under the Soviet regime), which published nothing but the 'party line.--1711E the advent of glasnost, open journalism returned to Russia, but it apparently On the other hand, some intelligent people may still see the value of logical discourse about religion and hasn't returnea to ME. Therefore, I recommend that TELICOM publish the Kor- admit the possibility that someone has achieved a verifiable formulation of religious knowledge. But eas verdict in full. regarding them, your point is trivial 2. Membership Roster. As you are undoubtedly aware, there has been no publication of an upaitia You imply that I judge a person's intelligence by whether or not he agrees with me. On the contrary, I —Romter since March 1994, although many personnel chang- es have occurred since then. In the September 1995 TELICOM, members were in- judge him not by his unconditional agreement with everything I say, but by his considered agreement formed that a more current version of the Roster could be downloaded from the with that part of my work which has already been logically justified. However, as I carefully justify most ISPE BBS network, by means of an online system. Subsequently. I wrote to Mar- of what I write in Noesis, your statement is as good as true for its readers. ina McInnis, to request a copy of this current Roster, but never received • response; several other members I correspond with are likewise lacking a current Roster. I agree with you that I should be trying to convince people that my religious insights are good. But persuasion is a two-way street, and failure can be less the fault of an expositor than of his audience. Had Einstein's pnmary audience consisted of art historians instead of other theoretical physicists, he could scarcely have been blamed for an inability to persuade them of relativity theory. Thus, when you ROWS Number Its March 1114 raw 27 NOESIS Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 2 suggest that my (Mega Society) audience is free of blame in the persuasion department, you seem less than evenhanded. After all, if my explanations were always as opaque as you imply, you or any other member could at any time have requested clarification. In any case, I have a hunch I'll soon be concentrating on a larger and somewhat less passive readership.

In your second letter, you accuse me of saying that "everyone has his price'. This is very close to the exact opposite of what I actually said. What I said was this. there is a definite threshold above which individual human utility is priceless, but below which it can be represented by a universal social convention called "money, and that it is in principle mathematically possible to achieve a monetary definition of rationality within this reshicted economic domain.

You state that I write in "an unconventional uneducated style", and then ask that I correct you if you are wrong. Well, your wish is my command. First, synopsis and didactic repetition are devices I've used many limes in Noesis. Second, a proposal for further work would be appropriate only in a grant proposal or in communicating with a research group whose members invest time and credit in each other's work And third, when your readers are playing blind, deaf and dumb, the last thing you want to do is bury them under a pile of "lemmas, theorems, and corollaries" The axiomatic method may be welcome in math journals and textbooks - I used it to communicate some of my work to our famous fellow member, Professor Thorp - but is a calculated tumoff anywhere else Good math instructors usually avoid it in their introductory courses, and even bad ones know that certain logical relations - e.g., much of what you call "spaghetti code" - unavoidably involve looping, recursive definitions best conveyed by analogy and generalization.

Last but not least, we come to what seems to be the real problem. Having cataloged my "defects" as a writer, you crown your critique with my worst "character flaw" of all: I like to get the last word, use it in my own behalf, and convey the impression that I'm right

If defending truth is the same as pretending to be infallible, then I'm guilty as charged. One who lets his audience be distracted by smut, crankery or diversionary trivia gives up any hope of communicating I ifilVi anything of value to anybody, and I'm not one to roll over so easily when I see a lot at stake. Now, I don't ct. deny having made my share of minor mistakes in life, and I reserve the nght to make yet more. That is, I 1 1 4 A 1 1 make no effort to deny that I'm human, at least with respect to the occasional oversight. But when it comes to things I consider important, the care I take in forming my conclusions makes them highly 10 111 H I nf* resistant to criticism, particularly of an emotional or inexpert variety. If it makes you feel better, I can 1 apologize for being right so often. But since the effect on your feelings would be temporary at best, you'd i 1111;: be better off resigning yourself to the facts. .tt r i kg( f il l ii 111- Ili§ Aside from my timeworn, repetitive request that you take the time and care to read what I write, that's ir ql;tri: ti ill!I 111R the best advice I can give you. Since I'm in the process of taking some of yours, you might finally consider reciprocating. ! ° I I 5 il lskI R 1114 0 111h z 1 t. t t N 1 0 R jihi !: As an inducement, let me close with the opinion of a reasonably intelligent acquaintance of mine who a Igh happened to see a couple of back issues of Noests lying on my desk. Scanning them, she asked to 11119 1 ;111 know the "grade level" of its contributors. When I informed her, not without embarrassment, that these I 111119 contributors were supposed to have some of the world's highest la's, she revealed her initial estimate: 1 . i ller e . 111°A t1 !I "in or near the eighth grade', which she associated with a level of maturity above which nobody could t i; gnii 1011 yt3 possibly countenance such puerile nonsense. I told her that I was trying to improve the journal's quality, but was getting late cooperation. Then she inquired how long I'd been at it At this point, embarrassment WWI J.111 ftliti gave way to something uncomfortably like apology Given the likelihood that other members have had i similar experiences, don't you think its time we all pulled together to bring this group more in line with g ;Pipit vl liv rational expectations arising from its exalted definition? I Chris Langan r I ill a ! I ! ill III! ROMS Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 3

GPM Langdon Intellectual Gradient High-range Test by Kevin Langdon Statistical Report Norming #1, February I, 1996

The Langdon Intellectual Gradient High-range Test (LIGHT) was distributed to attendees at American Mensa's Annual Gathering in San Francisco in July 1992 and printed in a number of high-1.0.-society newsletters. The test is composed of 40 items, including 30 items drawn from the Langdon Adult Intelligence Test (LA1T, 1977, published in Omni, April 1979; no longer scored) and ten new items. The scoring deadline for the test was December 31, 1993. Thirty people submitted answer sheets before the deadline. They are the population on which this norming study is based. These 30 people reported a total of 52 scores on previously-taken tests, of which only 22 (on three tests, the LSF1T, the Graduate Record Examination and the Mega Test) were used in norming the LIGHT. The author and publisher of the Mega Test is Dr. Ronald K. Hoehn (P.O. Box 539, New York, NY 10101). A sample of thirty is so small that this cannot be regarded as more than a preliminary norming, despite the fact that the distribution of scores is statistically reason- able. More than three previous scores were reported for only six tests. Of these, three (the Scholastic Aptitude Test, the California Test of Mental Maturity, and the Cattell Verbal), do not have sufficient ceiling to discriminate accurately within the highly selected population of testees reporting usable previous scores, whose mean I.Q. was 151.0 (the mean for all testees was 140.8).

Table 1 Number, Mean I.Q. on the Previous Test (sigma = 16), LIGHT Scaled Score Mean, and Correlation with Scaled Scores for the Six Most Frequently Reported Previous Tests Prey. Scaled Correlation Test Number Mean Mean with LIGHT SAT 7 147 61 .87 LSFIT 9 151 63 .85 GRE 4 153 63 .56 Mega Test 9 150 64 .54 CTMM 5 135 14 .50 Cattell Verbal 6 135 28 .47

Preliminary weighted scores were calculated, with each item weighted by the reciprocal of the number of testees answering the item correctly. The point biserial correlation of each item with these weighted scores was computed. Scaled scores were calculated, with each item weighted by its point biserial correlation divided by the number of testees who answered the item correctly. A scaled score of 0 cor- responds to an I.Q. of 113; a scaled score of 100 would correspond to an 1.0. of 173.

Copyright C 1996 by Polymath Systems. All rights reserved. ligC38110 Number 116 March 1996 nue 4 LSFIT, GRE, and Mega score pairs were weighted by the correlation of the previous test involved, for each pair, with LIGHT scaled scores, in computing and equating scaled and previous score means and average deviations and in computing standard deviations and the overall correlation of scaled scores with previous scores used, which was .65.

91. I Average deviations were used instead of standard deviations in test equating, because the standard deviations of the far-right-tail samples involved in norming tests designed to assess very high I.Q.'s are highly susceptible to distortion by a few out- lying points, due to the squared term involved. Using average deviations reduces this problem to a manageable level and improves the accuracy of the resulting scaling of raw scores to I.Q. Standard deviation was set at 16 in calculating I.Q.'s.

The reliability of the LIGHT, calculated using Kuder-Richardson formula 20, is .98. This is extremely high, especially for such a small sample, and must be regarded as a statistical anomaly. The standard error of measurement is 5.2 scaled score points, or 2.7 points of I.Q. The norming method used aims for maximum accuracy at the high end; the LIGHT is probably most accurate between two and four standard deviations above the general population mean. The floor of the LIGHT is three points lower than that of the LAIT, as is its ceiling.

Table 2 Scatter Diagram of LIGHT and Previous Scores Used in Norming, in Standard Deviations Above the Mean

LIGHT

3 1.25 1.75 2.25 2.75 3.25 3.75 4.25 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Total • 1.25 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

L50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

L75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

2.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2

2.75 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

3.00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 6

125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

150 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3

175 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 4 4.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Total 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 5 5 2 2 0 3 22

DOM@ Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 5 Table 3 Mean, Average Deviation, Standard Deviation, and Correlation with LIGHT (where applicable) of LIGHT and Reported Previous Score Distributions Average Standard Correlation Test Number Mean Deviation Deviation with LSFIT LIGHT Total (Scaled) 30 44.8 32.5 35.1 LIGHT Total (1.0.) 30 140.8 19.5 21.1 LIGHT Used (Scaled) 22 63.4 14.5 26.1

7359510

LIGHT Used (LW 22 151.0 8.7 13.1 21

i 1 LSFIT/GRE/Mega 22 3.19 .55 .82 .65 FM X ii SAT 7 2.97 .27 .34 .87 LSFIT 9 3.19 .74 .91 .85 GRE 4 3.29 .39 .47 .56 t 11-""701 2 Mega Test ill &all 9 3.15 .30 .43 .54 11 *yl l CTMM 5 2.21 .55 .63 .50 [A 4 ".!i Cattell Verbal 6 2.21 .23 .28 .47 sill' Note: Previous score means are in standard deviations above the mean of the general population; average deviations and standard deviations are in general population standard deviation units. ill

Table 4 1.0.'s and Tested Group Percentiles Corresponding to Scaled Scores Tested Tested Tested ft Scaled Group Scaled Group Scaled Group 6 Score 1.0. Toile Score I.Q. %Ile Score I.Q. %Ile 00 113 00 35 134 33 70 155 76 05 116 13 40 137 33 75 158 80 10 119 13 45 140 36 80 161 90 15 122 23 50 143 36 85 164 90 20 125 30 55 146 36 90 167 90 25 128 30 60 149 46 95 170 93 30 131 33 65 152 66 97 171 96

mum Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 6 Table 5 Distribution of I.Q. Scores Obtained by 30 LIGHT Testees 10 Range Number 10I2ange Number 10 Range Number 113-115 5 136-139 1 160-163 3

THE KORMES CASE AND ITS AFTERMATH -- Page 2. 116-119 0 140-143 0 164-167 0 b) The Judge stated that, by expelling Williams and Korner, without a 120-123 3 144-147 2 168-171 2 hearing, the ISPE Trustees had exceeded their authority, and had violated the contractual rights of the two expelled officers. 124-127 2 148,151 6 172-173 0 c) The Judge refused to reinstate Korman, on grounds that he had "dirty hands" -- that is, the Judge decided that Kormes was not entitled to reinstatt 128-131 1 152-155 4 ment in ISPE, because of his implication in the wrongful expulsion of William!. in 1990. In my opinion, this is a highly questionable and self-contradictory 132-135 0 156159 1 ruling. Under the U.S. judicial system, due process rights are inalienable, and cannot be 'sacrificed" by any defendant, no matter how heinous his conduct 9. When ISPE reported the outcome of this case to its members, via an "of- ficial' announcement in TELICOM, they merely stated that (ormes's claim for reinstatement had been denied, and neglected to mention the other aspects of Table 6 Judge Bernstein's ruling, designated above as 8 a) and 8 bl. Number Tested and Mean 1.0. for Selected Groups Society COMMENTARY. Ever since 1979, when ISPE expelled six of its members by fiat, Group Number Mean 1.0. 1.0. Cutoff without a hearing or a statement of charges, this Society has held the threat of expulsion over the heads of its members, in order to stifle freethought, Total 30 140.8 and prevent any challenge to the power of its controlling officers. So far as is known, Menses has expelled only one of its members, and Intertel has expelle, two; thus the "expulsion-to-member ratio' in ISPE is far higher than that of Males 24 143.3 any other high-I0 society, and projected proportionally on an organization the Females 4 129.0 size of Manse, would be equivalent to one thousand expulsions. Age 20-29 1 121.0 The worst part of ISPE's attitude, in the opinion of many observers, is its Age 30-39 10 142.6 direct repudiation of the tenets of American democracy. This organization Age 40-49 6 143.2 claims a tax exemption from the U.S. Government, but has nothing but contempt for American principles of due process and freedom of the press. Even now, Age 50-59 2 160.0 faced with • Court ruling condemning their illegal expulsions, the ISPE Trus- Age 60-69 1 113.0 tees refuse to acknowledge that they have done anything wrong, and have present Age 70-79 2 113.0 ed the ISPE membership with a misleading and incomplete account of what the Court actually said. Mensa 16 140.6 133 I am attaching herewith a verbatim reproduction of Judge Bernsteln's Ruling Top One Pct. 5 138.8 138 Of July 18, 1995, so that all interested individuals can read it for themselve. Intertel 8 140.6 138 ISM 3 145.0 150 One-in-1000 2 1495 150 Triple Nine 8 151.6 150 Prometheus 2 158.0 164 Four Sigma 1 169.0 164 Mega 2 151.0 176

Polymath Systems, P.O. Box 795, Berkeley, CA 94701 MKS Number 115 March 1SIM prae22

EOM Number 116 March 1996 PAGE? The Miibius Test by Cyril Edwards and Kevin Langdon

This is a high-range intelligence test of an unusual type. It is highly loaded on THE HORSES CASE AND ITS AFTERMATH both g, the general factor in intelligence, and intellectual creativity. Copyright (C) 1996 by PAUL MAXIM A preliminary version of this test was developed and circulated by Cyril Ed- wards in 1978. The preliminary test was taken by a number of members of various In 1990-1991, a political upheaval occurred within the ISPE Society which ha; high-1.Q. societies, but was never normed. The test in its present form contains represented a source of controversy, and of legal wrangling, ever since. Here is a brief synopsis of what happened: fifteen items by Cyril Edwards and five items by Kevin Langdon, who edited the present form. 1. In 1989, Betty Hansen took over as ISPE's President, and promptly began imposing her "stamp" on this organization. It is assumed that the testee has been exposed to the subject matter of a college-preparatory high school curriculum. No additional background is needed to 2. In 1990, Clinton C. Williams, then ISPE's Director of AdMissions, at- solve the items contained in the test. tempted (acting unilaterally) to replace ISPE's logo with a picture of "a bearded man" (Christopher Harding). He was rebuked for this by President Hansen, who ordered him removed from his position as Director of Admissions. While some of the items may seem strange, each item has at least one correct answer. Most of the items have a single correct answer. 3. Williams retaliated by criticising ISPE as phony, and by establishing a mock ID society named "Cleo," after mrs. Hansen's cat. Thereupon. Hansen de- does not have a separate answer sheet. Please provide the manded that ISPE's Trustees expel Williams (a life member), which was done, The M5bitis Test without a hearing, in late 1990. general information requested on page one, mark your answers on the test itself (or a copy), and submit it for scoring, with a scoring fee of $12 (U.S. funds, drawn on a 4. By order of President Hansen, the TELICOM issue of November-December U.S. bank, please). You will receive a score report, including a scaled score, tested- 1990 contained a five-page denunciation of Williams, who was not accorded group and general-population percentiles, and 1.40., within six to eight weeks. right of response. Thus, he was pillioried before the Society he had once served as an officer. Because your markings may provide help for others taking the test, please do S. During 1990, John Korman, ISPE's Legal Officer end Vice President, had not share a marked-up copy of the test with another person. You may obtain a fresh represented one of Williams's chief accusers, and had recommended his ouster copy of the test by sending either a self-addressed, stamped, business-size envelope without a hearing. But in 1991, a political dispute broke Out between Holmes or a dollar bill to Polymath Systems, P.O. Box 795, Berkeley, CA 94701. and President Hansen, which led to Rome& own expulsion in December 1991. As in the Williams case, Homes was denounced via a five-page accusation in the Age TELICOM issue of November-December 1991, without being accorded right of re- Name sponse. Address Sex 6. Formes, an attorney, filed suit against ISPE, claiming wrongful expulsion, and requesting reinstatement, and demanding that the Court impose certain reforms on ISPE's method of disciplining its members. This case became infamous as the "Romeo affair," and Formes was repeatedly denounced and scapegoated in the pages of TELICOM, without ever being allowed to present NfembershipsinFligh4.Q.Sodeties(pastandpresent): his side of the story. Instead, he used the Triple Nine journal, VIDYA, to denounce ISPE for its lack of democracy. ScoresonPreviouMyTaken1.0.andAptitudeTests 7. This case wound up costing each side over $5,000 in legal fees. On the Please provide total I.Q. score for Polymath Systems tests raw score for tests published by Dr. Ronald ISPE side, most of the cost was borne by its Chairman, W.I. Head. ISPE also IC kloeflin, and total scaled score for the SAT and GRE Do not list tests whose names you don't used its journal to solicit contributions to an "anti-Formes" fund from its know, percentiles, or scores indicated as a range or with a plus sign (e.g., "150 +"). general membership, which was wrongfully told that these donations were deductable from their federal income tax, under the aegis of "educational and Score Year Taken charitable contributions." Although ISM does have a Section 501 (c) 3 exemp- Test tion, legal expenses are not deductable under this rubric.

8. In July 1995, Judge Bernstein of the Court of Ccemon Pleas in Philadel- phia handed down his verdict, which contained three major points, to wit:

a) The Judge stated that, according to the provisions of ISPE's Charter. any member faced with expulsion was entitled to a hearing. Copyright C 1978, 1996 by Polymath Systems. All rights reserved. HMIS Numb., 1111 March UN PAM 21

Mann Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 8 13

g n :g 555.1, g; siA\NM,S,. 41/4 de 01F!!: PM p \ ;,',-* III i !HF liFIY ilanKli 'Mit? mi ! a;I: tii if g a -gi vg W g- v. i tig 1 I n 1.4gE , i_ 1.4 s 4 MU iii How many of the above constitute a complete set? fli ti tit 3/ 'li lar rEl alai Aq lilt 6 A4 '3 -1 .z..qi 48SttE t 4-: 2 -a Im - El. gi, yw lai'. sai 29 Alas g ill 1 wigsr, lriti tag it 9, N g 11.4 -ii 0:2 g i 111:1 1/I 1. This problem, along with the clues for its solution, is composed of exactly one 2.1101 ! ; .. 7 hundred words grouped into nine sentences of various lengths. 011 i'. rdre. tp•-1 i t- as iti E ! gl h 04: i 0 [DI h•F 2. No two are of the same length and they have been numbered to make it easy to 7 aS* s -aata • I 8-11. W. s ma-=5 ir, count them. gra 1 : 3 31 zrt eih as: I in i ir 134 rf lis !sat qr ;tii 4 3. They are arranged by length, and you are encouraged to verify that fact if you 7s---- • s doubt it. jil 4 cE3 11 141 611;1 ?IP 1 l I 0.-F 4. If this arrangement seems odd, you are primarily correct, with one minor ex- il 1. A e 5.2. grIES ?leg' 4 ception. il& ' P.- 4-i- 949. isys, st hrl Os! &gad! 5. lll1 II Careful examination of the clues provided should reveal the correct solution. 11 l wi: I IV eirr a,i .i. a 6. Indicate the solution by underlining one word. kg * 5 2F-9.4 Illi 1 7. A lucky guess is unlikely. 151. 15E4 EilTsiE ..... 15 8. You are warned. 9. Happy hunting.

le —4 30 14 "1 31BVII 1 AT 1111111 Er li 7 47 Pedir 8 Although Bill can't detect every false greenback, he is judiciously keeping less money_ It!5 !..-s i Wit 1 ti ElifiV i'.1521g 14 :. I T>; Select an appropriate continuation for the sentence above by underlining one word in each column. st gill currently above expenditures ai t$ i:1! il p_11 II ix-sf lately beyond necessities ct ir ..*w . now exceeding purchases I! ill! 11:11 !1!! today over requirements P w ,,, t 11111 I I 0 I. 2 r. I:21. pal111:1l :tg ht111 ! 03 1 ..›r.2 . niera , 17 4E all !I Mir -t-Ont i 3 Ni"R•t' [lilt Having solved the preceding problem, you should now be able to provide an equally k JP psctigif huff .“ MO Ifitwi 130 appropriate three- or four-word comment to justify your choice. CS x^wi fie24",m-; IR 9 ga 91 la Rati 81 HIP 4 Aiiki 4. 1g 11! .44 041,11- =1 q,i 1 ritli Mil 1 ii10- tiiiiir 1 !N;ii P. A hi 01491M i Mil gillil

REMO Number 116 March 1995 PAGE 9 8

Paul Maxim to Jeff Ward -- Late January 1996 -- Page 2 of 2.

e o I am told that it was published in Mr. Langdon's "LAST Notating Report No. R R 2." Please note that, if the "scaled score" is zero -- that is, if the testae fails to answer any questions correctly -- the resultant 10 value is 113.3, about equal to that of a 'grade B" college student. Now, I 3 fail to understand this strange type of psychometrics, and suspect that such a thing could never occur on any of the "standard" or 'conventional" IP tests -- the ones that Mr. Langdon has been attempting to discredit Complete the indicated multiplication. and outlaw for the past decade. Mr. Langdon has frequently attempted to argue that "self-selection" automatically boosts the IOu of those indi- 2 1 1 1 viduals who take (or have taken) his tests, but I don't see how "self- selection" can turn an idiot into a genius, or why the LAIT should be x 1 1 1 1 accepted as an accurate instrument for mental measurement, if it can pro- 2 1 1 1 duce such grotesque results as that shown above.

-- -- — -- Mr. Langdon's statement, in the TNS ExCom Memo of January 15, 1996, is a - — — -- public document, since it was published without copyright. Hence, you are free, if you so desire, to republish it, along with this letter.

I thank you for your attention and consideration. 7 ncerely

Complete the words in the true statement below PAUL MAXIM, P.O. Box 120 New York, N.Y. 10012-0002 /10 T w B w c L Enclosure.

[Editor's comments-A. I don't mind people npping into each other in Noesa over ideas 10 or even personalities but I'm not so happy about attacks on qualifications especially when B. the conflict started in another lugh-10 gloms and C. much of the pertinent On entry to this problem, it would be well to begin with reexamination of our count- matenal has appeared in one or more other loumals We haven't had maim stMe over ing and spelling. (If I've any doubts, I 3C-ray.) You might perhaps even weigh this clualdiathons I hope we can avoid most such Mitery D. I was very. very bummed problem, if you use the proper instrument, this won't be an inept endeavor. when I found out that my high school Stanford-Binet was only in the 150's Veers later I found out that the test doesn't go any hither I Please underline your solution. MOMS= Numbdif ite March ISIS •Aae111

ENE@ Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 10 6

Late January 1996

Mr. Jeff Ward Executive Officer Mega Society 13155 Wimberly Square 1284 2 San Diego, CA 92128 All of the terms below relate, directly or indirectly, to the use of language. Addi- Dear Jeff, tionally, a number of them indicate another set. Provision has been made for you to Thanks for your letter of last October 10, and for the in- identify them in an appropriate manner. formation contained therein. You may (or may not) be aware of the exis- tence of a publication, by the Triple Nine Society, called the "Execu- tive Committee Memorandum," which circulates to about 45 members of that organization, and represents its political 'laundry sheet." DO In a recent ACT issue of this publication, there was reprinted the same statement (from a "reliable source") concerning Kevin Langdon's IQ qualifications that TALK I sent you last Spring. I submitted this for publication, not primarily to embarass Mr. Langdon, but because I felt he had not been sufficiently FABLE forthcoming concerning the matter of his credentials for participation SCREED in groups such as Mega and Four Sigma. (Also, since he attacked my credentials. I thought I would 'return him the compliment," if you know ORATORY what I mean.) In the January 15, 1996 issue of the TNS ExCom Memo, Mr. PARABLE Langdon responded to the statement concerning his 10 credentials with a statement of his own, in which he acknowledged the correctness of what ELUCIDATE had been said about him, and also added further-iNfaiiraTMEZUncerning ELLIPSIS his score on the Stanford-Binet exam (I am enclosing herewith a photo- copy of Mr. Langdon's published statement). HYPER BOLE The gist of his disclosure is as follows: DIALECTOLOGY al He acknowledges that he never scored 'four sigma' on PRE VAR ICA TOR `I any generally recognized IQ test. b) At the time that Chris Harding erroneously attributed CIRCUML CUT ION to Kevin Langdon a Stanford-Binet IQ of 196 (which was used as the basis for Mr. Langdon's admission to Mega), Mr. Langdon was aware of the error but he nonetheless accepted membership on this improper basis. 31 c) When Mr. Langdon took the Stanford-Binet test in high school, he scored 155, which is equivalent to 3.4 sigma. I suspect that this score is representative of Mr. Langdon's performance on 'standard" 3 or conventional tests -- i.e., he generally scores in the 3-sigma, not the 4-sigma range. A 2

I have also attempted to conduct an independent veri- 2 fication of the accuracy of Mr. Langdon's listing of 650 "Four Sigma Qual- ifiers,' which he published in his Summer 1989 issue of the Four Sigma Bulletin No. 2. My purported methodology was fairly simple:-1771., I in- 1 tended to tabulate all non-LAIT scores that theme 650 individuals had on file, to ascertain what percentage of them had scored 4-sigma on any test 1 other than LA!?; in this way, I hoped to obtain a rough indication of whether Mr. Langdon's LAIT assessment procedures were producing inflated scores. So far, Mr. Langdon has refused to cooperate with this investi- 1 gation, and he recently stated (to one of my colleagues) that he regards his testes files as 'confidential.' in other words, they are not open to other psychometric researchers. 1

MOMS Number III Match ISIS Paean,

540IION Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 11 RS _ _ _ _ RS

_ _ E S _ _ _ E S RS "HOW INTELLIGENT Is ISPE?" Page l. The sum of the above answers is 1011. Further Confirmation Needed. One further mode of confirmation which might be applied to the above studies would be to gather statistics pertaining to the performance of both Mensans and ISPE members on standard tests. The main dif- 3 ficulty here is to obtain the data from those who (presumably) have it; both Mensa and ISPE have proven uncooperative in this regard. After all, it is now rather late in the day; had they wanted to perform these kinds of studies, and make their results public, they would have done so a long time ago. A certain amount of data pertaining to standard test scores reported by members of these two societies is also in the possession of Messrs. Langdon and Hoeflin, since each LAIT and/or Mega taste° was called upon to report such scores along with submission of his test form for scoring. So far, to the best of my knowledge, a such "standard" score data has never been compiled and published, but perhaps these two testmakers will now come forward, and shed a little more factual il- lumination on this important topic.

2 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION. Based on the two studies cited above, I reach the same conclusion as did Grady Towers in his "Drunkard's Walk" article: namely that Finding a pattern embedded in this, the echo the IQ level of ISPE members shows no statistical differentiation from that of cognition problem, engenders insight. Mensa members, and is at least ten points below what might be expected from a Work out unknown condition. Group units; like elements go together. true "3-sigma" society. Towers-E7pot esizertFat much of this "IQ inadequacy" might have stemmed from weaknesses in the Skyscraper test, but I do not believe there is enough evidence on hand, at this point, to warrant such a conclusion. 6 A Closing Note. The relatively high performance manifested by Mensans in these Complete the rightmost column of the table appropriately. two studies appears to cast additional lustre on this society's overall IQ. But there may be a negative side to these statistics as well, since they imply that dense is actually recruiting at a threshold above the "top 21" it adver- tises, which in turn suggests that numerous applicants at or slightly above the "top 21" have been unfairly rejected; if true, this would mean that Mensa has artificially delimited its own size and growth. This possibility would be W M ESI F much easier to appraise, were mensa in the habit of occasionally publishing its IQ statistics, but it does nothing of the sort. Rather, Manua appears to have adopted a "bunker attitude" toward any inquiries concerning its own testing and evaluation procedures, and now characterizes them as an invasion of its privacy, Isi VI 11 1- etc. Over the past 50 years, International Mensa has tested or evaluated close to a quarter of a million applicants, thus providing it with an outstanding 0 N ICI F opportunity for compiling an unmatched high-lp data base. Since Manse has described its purpose as the "fostering of human intelligence," and since (alone among the high-IQ societies) it maintains a Research Foundation, and publishes a Research Journal, one would imagine that it would do everything in its power xx zc to preaerve and classify valuable psychometric data. Unfortunately, just the opposite is true. We have been told, by a responsible Mensa officer, that, following the testing and/or evaluation of each candidate, all test data is de- VI [><1 N N \ stroyed, save for a notation, in the member's file, as to lona test-hror shi qualified on. Had Mensa wanted to do so, it could (by this time) have compiled extensive statistical surveys, showing items such as the mean 10 of its members, OFIFIF the mean IQ of its unsuccessful candidates, the mean 10 of all applicants, brok- en down by age. sex, country of origin, and the like. A good deal of valuable data might also have been compiled on IQ tests themselves, which would further help in evaluating their effectiveness as selection instruments. But Monza did none of these things, and is not likely to do them, for reasons that the reader can infer for himself. F7 Min Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 12 26

There are twenty-four possible permutations of any four objects. The ones below have been arranged in four columns ofsbcgroups each. All of the groups in one of "HOW INTELLIGENT IS ISPE?" Page 2 the columns share a certain unique property. Once you discover this property, you should be abletoindicateyoursolutionin the figures of the appropriate:column. Menem also had grown, and was showing a membership of about 50,000: hence, the 27 testees in this study represent a much smaller proportion of that society than did Langdon's 442. 0=A 0 OA CHAD OLO Here are some observations to be drawn from Towers's study: a) It did not contradict the earlier Langdon study, but reinforced it: 0 AO OLIII0 GO DA GA DO

b) It showed the Mensa testes, as having an even higher relative 10; 0 OA OAOD GOAD EGAC cl The ISPE members (who were not also TNS members) ranked lowest of GEIAC ECAG EGO'S DAGO the four groups shown above, and about 211 points below the Manse members; they were also about 61/2 points below the TNS members. MOOL A000 EACH A 00 d) Testees who were members of ISPE and Triple Nine scored the best of all four groups shown above, and were a whopfaeig 134. 19 points above those who LOMO L01:10 LOON LE100 belonged to ISPE alone.

el The mean I0 manifested by the ISPE members is about twelve points 11 below the "theoretical mean" for a group with a 3-sigma threshold.

Interpretation. In searching for some possible explanation for these unusual Perpendicular alignment supplies concealed algebraic line. results, a number of theories might be considered, as follows: 1 2 6 20 70 I. The Menne members enjoyed some special "advantage as compared to the ISPE members, such as "self-selection": i.e., only the most intelligent Mensans came forward to take Mega. 2 "This theory doesn't seem to hold any special plau- sibility, since by the late 1900's, there were enough ISPE members to allow "self-selection" to operate there as well. In fact, the results of this study Study and, finding new forms, solve logical conundrum. Key concept, discerned, links appear to argue against the entire concept of "self-selection," precisely be- central swords elegantly—isolate. cause the ISPE members did so poorly.

II. The Menses members were more familiar with unsupervised tests such as 7 Mega. "Just the reverse seems to be true, since Menus does not permit admission on the basis of "super" tests such as LAI? or Mega, whereas numerous ISPE mem- Although some of these problems may seem impossible to solve, each of them has a bars had gained admission via LAIT and Harding's "Skyscraper," another "super" logical solution. Attempts to work the problems should not degenerate into making test. random associations. Some of the problems have hidden aspects; one must carefully examine parts of speech, tenses, and cases. Unexpected connections may appear. For example, one of the problems features two additional members of a class by III. For various reasons, "super" tests distort the true IQ of their testees. defined another problem. You may indicate your answer by underlining two of the words in "This may be true, but it must nonetheless be acknowledged that most LAIT test- the problem you are reading now. ees, and most Mega testae., took these tests under pretty much the same condi- • tions, that is to say, there is no reason to presume that any one group enjoyed an advantage over any other. Hence, even though the resultant scores may not be absolutely accurate as regards comparison to a "standard" scale, they nonetheless appear to manifest relative validity -- that is, they can reliably be . Submit your completed test form, with $12 for scoring compared against each other. (U.S. funds, drawn on a U.S. bank), to: Polymath Systems, P.O. Box 795, Berkeley, CA 94701

There is no scoring fee for test answers postmarked on or before June 30, 1996. 110201111 Numbw 116 Math 1514 pall

NECKS Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 13 Mid-March, 1996 HOW INTELLIGENT IS ISPE? Mr. Rick Rosner Copyright (C) 1996 by PAUL MAXIM NOESIS Editor Since its establishment in 1974, ISPE has billed itself as a "one in a thous- Dear Rick: I received on March 16 my copy of NOESIS No. 114 (January). and' society, whose members are all (or mostly all) at the 3-sigma level in Hence, 1 would like to congratulate you on getting yoursel: terms of IO; this equates with the 149 mark on the Stanford-Binet scale. "back into business" after your relocation. Since Mensa claims to recruit at the "upper 26' level, this would tend to in- My first order of business is to dicate that ISPE members are 20 times rarer in the general population than correct certain mistakes and errors which have appeared in my prior NOESIS nu! are Nansens. ISPE has made tEl !troll—Ms presumed differentiation, going missions, to wit: so far as to call itself "The Thousand," which (as someone pointed out) 1. In the second part of my monograph, entitled "A Cryptopo. should more properly have been, "The Thousandth.' But is their 10 really by Hallam*" (NOESIS, December 1995), I incorrectly listed the perihelion vel, that high? In other words, how would they, as a group, score on an IQ test city of Comet 1882 II as "360 miles per second," whereas it was closer to 297 administered at the same time to Mensa, and to other high-level groups? miles per second. The "360" number pertains symbolically to sungrazing comet: by representing the fastest velocity attained by any of these comets, particu- To the best of my knowledge, there are only two case studies on record, in larly those which came within .005 A.U. of the Sun. Hence, if we were to phra which an IQ test was administered in such a manner. One resulted from the a question, "What solar system object reaches a velocity of 360 mos, and "live LAST testing program conducted by Kevin Langdon between 1977 and 1979, which to talk about it," the only answer would be, "A sungrazing comet." was reported by him in his "LMT Worming Report No. 2" (July 1979), and the other consisted of a study conducted by Grady Towers, about a decade later, 2. I am informed, by an expert on comets, that in 1870 the which he reported in an article entitled. "Drunkard's Walk" (VIDYA 4101 astronomer Pontecoulant forecasted a date of "24 May 1910" for the return of ). Here, he described the relative performance of six high-I0 groups on Halley's Comet. However, "76 years was the comet's mean period back to 1531, Ron Hoeflin's Mega test during the latter 1980's; they included Four Sigma and its minimum osculating period since 1531." Hence, the date "1911," which Society members, Manse members, ISPE members, Triple Nine Members, Intertel I interpreted as a symbolic reference to this comet's return, is still valid, members, and individuals who belonged to both ISPE and Triple Nine. since it represents the date of the Comet's previous apparition (1835), plus its mean or "nominal" orbital period (76 years). 1. Langdon's 1979 study was fairly extensive, and covered 553 testees who had taken MIT, before it was published in OMNI; among these were 442 Mensa 3. The middle six letters of the poem's opening line (Mute members, and 61 ISPE members. This may be considered a representative sam- Vine resumee) spell la mare ("mother"). I did not notice this, until if was ple, since in 1979, ISPE's membership was somewhere around 125. Here is the Foritea"7:Cto- me by Me-EaTtor of WORD WAYS (Ross Eckler); the positioning of way the scores came out: The Manse members recorded a mean MIT IQ of 141.48, these six letters indicates that they represent the poem's disguised title. while the ISPE members had a mean MIT 10 of 142.88, only 11/4 points higher. Thus, I arrived at the conclusion that the poem concerned Mal arme's MOTRr vs. a torturous process of numerical analysis, whereas Eckler arrived at the same These figures begin to take on meaning when compared to the "entry threshold" conclusion via a more direct route. and "theoretical mean IQ' for both groups. In the case of Mensa, the threshold would be 133, and the theoretical mean around 137, while for ISPE the 4. In my letter on pp. 15-16 of the January NOESIS, I stated threshold should have been 149, and the "theoretical mean" around 153. This that Ron Hoeflin did not wish to grant me access to his psychometric data on means that the Manse members tested considerably more intelligent than they MIT norming. However, he has now changed his mind, and is providing me with should have, and the ISPE members considerably less. /n addition, the amount photocopies of this material, at a nominal price. of statistical separation between these two groups was so small as to be neg- ligible -- in other words, insofar as "testable" intelligence is concerned, I am submitting herewith some new material, including a three-page article, en- ISPE came off as just an "extension" of Menge, without any indication of a titled: "How Intelligent is ISPE?" Data contained herein has been derived ma" 20 to one' selection differential. ly from Langdon's "MIT Homing Report No. 2," plus Grady Towers' article, "Drunkard's Walk," in VIDYA No, 101. However, I think this is the first time 2. Grady Towers's study was based on statistics supplied to him by Ron Reef- these two articles have been brought into a single focus, with "real" IP num- lin; some excerpts from it are tabulated below: bers attached to the raw score numbers published by Langdon and Towers. Membership No. Mean HerCII S.D. 3 g I am also submitting a two-page article entitled, "The Kormes Case and Its Af- 1.!SP! Triple N ne TS 28.13 ITO 33 termath," which is accompanied by an eleven-page ruling emanating from the 2. TNS Alone 29 21.724 7.713 148 Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia. This material does not pertain directly 3. Menge 27 18.963 7.613 144 to the Mega Society, but rather to ISPE and Triple Nine. However, since a few 4. ISPE Alone 18 16.444 4.382 141.5 NOESIS subscribers are also ISPE members, and since the subject of expulsions is of general interest in the high-I0 world, I thought the material would be Here, I have added equivalent Stanford-Binet 10 figures, drawn from Hoeflin's useful.. .please publish as much of it as you see fit. Even though the Judge's sixth naming of the Mega test (OATH No. 7, January 1993). It will be noted ruling in this case directly affects the governance of ISPE, ISPE's controlled that we are dealing here with a much smaller sample than in Langdon's study a press never mentioned two of the principal points covered by this ruling, be- decade earlier. By 1990, ISPE had grown to around 400 members, and so a sam- cause they found fault with the ISPE administration.., in other words, a cult ple of "18" is not nearly so significant, statistically, as Langdon's *61." always strives to suppress_anything detrimental to its own false image. Best wishes, I , PAUL MAXIM, P.O. Box 120, NYC 1001. Is LL Mid-March, 1996 HOW INTELLIGENT IS ISPE? Mr. Rick Rosner Copyright (C) 1996 by PAUL MAXIM NOESIS Editor Since its establishment in 1974, ISPE has billed itself as a "one in a thous- Dear Rick: I received on March 16 my copy of NOESIS No. 114 (January). and' society, whose members are all (or mostly all) at the 3-sigma level in Hence, 1 would like to congratulate you on getting yoursel: terms of IO; this equates with the 149 mark on the Stanford-Binet scale. "back into business" after your relocation. Since Mensa claims to recruit at the "upper 26' level, this would tend to in- My first order of business is to dicate that ISPE members are 20 times rarer in the general population than correct certain mistakes and errors which have appeared in my prior NOESIS nu! are Nansens. ISPE has made tEl !troll—Ms presumed differentiation, going missions, to wit: so far as to call itself "The Thousand," which (as someone pointed out) 1. In the second part of my monograph, entitled "A Cryptopo. should more properly have been, "The Thousandth.' But is their 10 really by Hallam*" (NOESIS, December 1995), I incorrectly listed the perihelion vel, that high? In other words, how would they, as a group, score on an IQ test city of Comet 1882 II as "360 miles per second," whereas it was closer to 297 administered at the same time to Mensa, and to other high-level groups? miles per second. The "360" number pertains symbolically to sungrazing comet: by representing the fastest velocity attained by any of these comets, particu- To the best of my knowledge, there are only two case studies on record, in larly those which came within .005 A.U. of the Sun. Hence, if we were to phra which an IQ test was administered in such a manner. One resulted from the a question, "What solar system object reaches a velocity of 360 mos, and "live LAST testing program conducted by Kevin Langdon between 1977 and 1979, which to talk about it," the only answer would be, "A sungrazing comet." was reported by him in his "LMT Worming Report No. 2" (July 1979), and the other consisted of a study conducted by Grady Towers, about a decade later, 2. I am informed, by an expert on comets, that in 1870 the which he reported in an article entitled. "Drunkard's Walk" (VIDYA 4101 astronomer Pontecoulant forecasted a date of "24 May 1910" for the return of ). Here, he described the relative performance of six high-I0 groups on Halley's Comet. However, "76 years was the comet's mean period back to 1531, Ron Hoeflin's Mega test during the latter 1980's; they included Four Sigma and its minimum osculating period since 1531." Hence, the date "1911," which Society members, Manse members, ISPE members, Triple Nine Members, Intertel I interpreted as a symbolic reference to this comet's return, is still valid, members, and individuals who belonged to both ISPE and Triple Nine. since it represents the date of the Comet's previous apparition (1835), plus its mean or "nominal" orbital period (76 years). 1. Langdon's 1979 study was fairly extensive, and covered 553 testees who had taken MIT, before it was published in OMNI; among these were 442 Mensa 3. The middle six letters of the poem's opening line (Mute members, and 61 ISPE members. This may be considered a representative sam- Vine resumee) spell la mare ("mother"). I did not notice this, until if was ple, since in 1979, ISPE's membership was somewhere around 125. Here is the Foritea"7:Cto- me by Me-EaTtor of WORD WAYS (Ross Eckler); the positioning of way the scores came out: The Manse members recorded a mean MIT IQ of 141.48, these six letters indicates that they represent the poem's disguised title. while the ISPE members had a mean MIT 10 of 142.88, only 11/4 points higher. Thus, I arrived at the conclusion that the poem concerned Mal arme's MOTRr vs. a torturous process of numerical analysis, whereas Eckler arrived at the same These figures begin to take on meaning when compared to the "entry threshold" conclusion via a more direct route. and "theoretical mean IQ' for both groups. In the case of Mensa, the threshold would be 133, and the theoretical mean around 137, while for ISPE the 4. In my letter on pp. 15-16 of the January NOESIS, I stated threshold should have been 149, and the "theoretical mean" around 153. This that Ron Hoeflin did not wish to grant me access to his psychometric data on means that the Manse members tested considerably more intelligent than they MIT norming. However, he has now changed his mind, and is providing me with should have, and the ISPE members considerably less. /n addition, the amount photocopies of this material, at a nominal price. of statistical separation between these two groups was so small as to be neg- ligible -- in other words, insofar as "testable" intelligence is concerned, I am submitting herewith some new material, including a three-page article, en- ISPE came off as just an "extension" of Menge, without any indication of a titled: "How Intelligent is ISPE?" Data contained herein has been derived ma" 20 to one' selection differential. ly from Langdon's "MIT Homing Report No. 2," plus Grady Towers' article, "Drunkard's Walk," in VIDYA No, 101. However, I think this is the first time 2. Grady Towers's study was based on statistics supplied to him by Ron Reef- these two articles have been brought into a single focus, with "real" IP num- lin; some excerpts from it are tabulated below: bers attached to the raw score numbers published by Langdon and Towers. Membership No. Mean HerCII S.D. 3 g I am also submitting a two-page article entitled, "The Kormes Case and Its Af- 1.!SP! Triple N ne TS 28.13 ITO 33 termath," which is accompanied by an eleven-page ruling emanating from the 2. TNS Alone 29 21.724 7.713 148 Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia. This material does not pertain directly 3. Menge 27 18.963 7.613 144 to the Mega Society, but rather to ISPE and Triple Nine. However, since a few 4. ISPE Alone 18 16.444 4.382 141.5 NOESIS subscribers are also ISPE members, and since the subject of expulsions is of general interest in the high-I0 world, I thought the material would be Here, I have added equivalent Stanford-Binet 10 figures, drawn from Hoeflin's useful.. .please publish as much of it as you see fit. Even though the Judge's sixth naming of the Mega test (OATH No. 7, January 1993). It will be noted ruling in this case directly affects the governance of ISPE, ISPE's controlled that we are dealing here with a much smaller sample than in Langdon's study a press never mentioned two of the principal points covered by this ruling, be- decade earlier. By 1990, ISPE had grown to around 400 members, and so a sam- cause they found fault with the ISPE administration.., in other words, a cult ple of "18" is not nearly so significant, statistically, as Langdon's *61." always strives to suppress_anything detrimental to its own false image. Best wishes, I , PAUL MAXIM, P.O. Box 120, NYC 1001. Is LL 26

el The mean I0 manifested by the ISPE members is about twelve points 11 below the "theoretical mean" for a group with a 3-sigma threshold.

There is no scoring fee for test answers postmarked on or before June 30, 1996. 110201111 Numbw 116 Math 1514 pall

NECKS Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 13 RS _ _ _ _ RS

Late January 1996

MOMS Number III Match ISIS Paean,

540IION Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 11 8

Paul Maxim to Jeff Ward -- Late January 1996 -- Page 2 of 2.

Please be so good as to also note the statement Mr. Langdon makes on Page 6 of his recent disclosure, to the effect that he's a member of the Four Sigma Society (and of its successor, Prometheus) because he founded Four Sigma, and not because he has "4-sigma" credentials. It therefore turns out that his status vis-a-vis Four Sigma/Prometheus is almost identical with his status as regards the Mega Society -- that is, SiiThel been a member for many years, and has enjoyed the benefits there- of, without possessing the qualifications that were demanded of other 8 members. Apparently, he was quite content to accept this situation, while at the same time denying admission into Prometheus to another ap- plicant who offered valid four-sigma credentials -- that is. myself. S v Finally, I obtained (from another intermediary) a copy of the formula Mr. M I Langdon uses to convert "scaled scores" on the LAIT to IO ratings, which B Es he contends are comparable to the Stanford-Binet scale. This formula is as follows: G G IO • ( Scaled Score - 466.990 ) 13.84 + 142.34 L v 222.501 e o I am told that it was published in Mr. Langdon's "LAST Notating Report No. R R 2." Please note that, if the "scaled score" is zero -- that is, if the testae fails to answer any questions correctly -- the resultant 10 value is 113.3, about equal to that of a 'grade B" college student. Now, I 3 fail to understand this strange type of psychometrics, and suspect that such a thing could never occur on any of the "standard" or 'conventional" IP tests -- the ones that Mr. Langdon has been attempting to discredit Complete the indicated multiplication. and outlaw for the past decade. Mr. Langdon has frequently attempted to argue that "self-selection" automatically boosts the IOu of those indi- 2 1 1 1 viduals who take (or have taken) his tests, but I don't see how "self- selection" can turn an idiot into a genius, or why the LAIT should be x 1 1 1 1 accepted as an accurate instrument for mental measurement, if it can pro- 2 1 1 1 duce such grotesque results as that shown above.

I thank you for your attention and consideration. 7 ncerely

Complete the words in the true statement below PAUL MAXIM, P.O. Box 120 New York, N.Y. 10012-0002 /10 T w B w c L Enclosure.

ENE@ Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 10 13

REMO Number 116 March 1995 PAGE 9 The Miibius Test by Cyril Edwards and Kevin Langdon

8. In July 1995, Judge Bernstein of the Court of Ccemon Pleas in Philadel- phia handed down his verdict, which contained three major points, to wit:

Mann Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 8 Table 5 Distribution of I.Q. Scores Obtained by 30 LIGHT Testees 10 Range Number 10I2ange Number 10 Range Number 113-115 5 136-139 1 160-163 3

Polymath Systems, P.O. Box 795, Berkeley, CA 94701 MKS Number 115 March 1SIM prae22

EOM Number 116 March 1996 PAGE?

Score Score

Scaled Scaled

30 30

15 15

10 10

25 25

05 05

20 20

00 00

average deviations and standard deviations are in general population standard deviation units. units. deviation standard population general in are deviations standard and deviations average

Cattell Verbal Verbal Cattell Note: Previous score means are in standard deviations above the mean of the general population; population; general the of mean the above deviations standard in are means score Previous Note:

CTMM CTMM

Mega Test Test Mega

SAT SAT

GRE GRE

LSFIT LSFIT

LSFIT/GRE/Mega LSFIT/GRE/Mega

LIGHT Used (LW (LW Used LIGHT

LIGHT Total (1.0.) (1.0.) Total LIGHT

Test Test

LIGHT Used (Scaled) (Scaled) Used LIGHT

LIGHT Total (Scaled) (Scaled) Total LIGHT

1.0. 1.0.

122 122

131 131 119 119

128 128 116 116

125 125

113 113

and Correlation with with Correlation and

33 33

23 23

13 13

Group Group 30 30

13 13

30 30

Tested Tested

00 00

Toile Toile

Mean, Average Deviation, Standard Deviation, Deviation, Standard Deviation, Average Mean,

mum mum

and Reported Previous Score Distributions Distributions Score Previous Reported and

1.0.'s and Tested Group Percentiles Percentiles Group Tested and 1.0.'s

Corresponding to Scaled Scores Scores Scaled to Corresponding

22 22

30 30

22 22

30 30

Number Mean Mean Number

5 5

65 65

9 9

60 60

6 6

Score Score

50 50

9 9

55 55

45 45

Scaled Scaled

4 4

40 40

7 7

35 35

Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 6 6 PAGE 1996 March 116 Number

LIGHT LIGHT

152 152 140 140

149 149 137 137

146 146

143 143

I.Q. I.Q.

134 134

151.0 151.0

140.8 140.8

Table 4 4 Table

Table 3 3 Table

63.4 63.4

44.8 44.8

2.21 2.21

3.15 3.15

2.21 2.21

3.29 3.29

3.19 3.19

2.97 2.97

3.19 3.19

(where applicable) of of applicable) (where

36 36

Group Group 66 66

36 36

Tested Tested

46 46

33 33

%Ile %Ile

33 33

19.5

14.5

32.5

Deviation Deviation with LSFIT LSFIT with Deviation Deviation

Average

8.7

.30

.23

.55

.39

.74

.27

.55

97 97

85 85

95 95

80 80

Score Score

90 90

Scaled Scaled

75 75

70 70

13.1 13.1

21.1 21.1

26.1 26.1

35.1 35.1

Standard

.43 .43

.28 .28

.63 .63

.47 .47

.91 .91

.82 .82

.34 .34

LIGHT LIGHT

171 171 161 161

170 170

167 167

164 164

158 158

155 155

I.Q. I.Q.

Correlation Correlation

.47 .47

.50 .50

.54 .54

.56 .56

.65 .65

.85 .85

.87 .87

90 90

96 96

93 93

90 90

80 80

Group Group

90 90

Tested Tested

%Ile %Ile

76 76 6 6

FM Xi 12157359510

sill' sill'

t t

ft ft

ill &all &all ill

11-""701 11-""701

*yl

l l

ill ill

" "

.!i .!i

ii ii 2 2 4

Total

is three

4.25

4.00

LIGHT

3.75

3.50

3.25

0 3 0 0 0 0 3

scaled scores, in computing and

3.00

2.75

and Previous Scores

LIGHT

2.50

0 0 0

2.25

pairs were weighted by the correlation of the

Table 2

LIGHT

calculated using Kuder-Richardson formula 20,

0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1

as is its ceiling.

2.00

norming method used aims for maximum accuracy at

1.75

Number 116 March 1996 PAGE 5

LAIT,

LIGHT,

The

1.50

Mega score

is probably most accurate between two and four standard

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 6

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 5 5 2 2 0 3 22 0 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

1.25

and

DOM@

Scatter Diagram of

LIGHT

Used in Norming, in Standard Deviations Above the Mean

L50

L75

1.25 2.25

2.00

2.50

2.75 3.00

150 4.00

175 Total 125

LSFIT, GRE,

Average deviations were used instead of standard deviations in test equating,

The reliability of the

used, which was .65. equating scaled and previous score means and average deviations and in computing previous test involved, for each pair, with

standard deviations and the overall correlation of scaled scores with previous scores because the standard deviations of the far-right-tail samples involved in norming tests

designed to assess very high I.Q.'s are highly susceptible to distortion by a few out- problem to a manageable level and improves the accuracy of the resulting scaling of lying points, due to the squared term involved. Using average deviations reduces this

raw scores to I.Q. Standard deviation was set at 16 in calculating I.Q.'s.

is .98. This is extremely high, especially for such a small sample, and must be regard- points, or 2.7 points of I.Q. the high end; the ed as a statistical anomaly. The standard error of measurement is 5.2 scaled score points lower than that of the deviations above the general population mean. The floor of the

1. 9

• Langdon Intellectual Gradient High-range Test by Kevin Langdon Statistical Report Norming #1, February I, 1996

Copyright C 1996 by Polymath Systems. All rights reserved. ligC38110 Number 116 March 1996 nue 4 suggest that my (Mega Society) audience is free of blame in the persuasion department, you seem less than evenhanded. After all, if my explanations were always as opaque as you imply, you or any other member could at any time have requested clarification. In any case, I have a hunch I'll soon be concentrating on a larger and somewhat less passive readership.

GPM LETTER FROM CHRIS LANGAN TO ROBERT DICK Dear Bob Dick:

P. Maxim to Dr. Robert J. Davis -- 'Tear-End Report' -- Page 2.

Magni Meant- .1 IS March 1555 floe 25